About me
Archive
About me

BMA votes against lowering abortion limit

close

Warning: This post was published more than 12 years ago.

I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!

But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:

  • My views might have changed in the 12 years since I wrote this post.
  • This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
  • Factual information might be outdated.
  • Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.

Many thanks for your understanding.

My union has helpfully agreed with my position on the lowering of the 24 week limit on abortions. Whilst I’m sure this will enrage the Daily Mail, it certainly cheered me up because, as far as I can see, there is no logical scientific reason for lowering the abortion limit.

The only scientific reason for doing so is because increasingly premature babies are surviving with medical assistance. But whilst that’s a reasonable scientific point, the logic isn’t present. Increasingly premature babies are going to continue to survive as medical technology improves, until eventually abortions will be impossible – or, more controversially – they will only be available to those who discover their pregnancy suitably early, thus probably disenfranchising those who are not expecting to become pregnant (and may therefore feel that they are in desperate need of an abortion). Very few of the campaigners supporting the idea of lowering the limit would support either of the above situations – and yet that is effectively what they are voting for.

The other popularly posited opinion is that now we have 3D scans, which allow us to see the foetus in greater detail than ever, we shouldn’t allow abortions at this stage of pregnancy. This is a foolish notion. Doctors have for many years seen the real foetus following abortion, and the foetus has always been at the same stage of development, even if it’s previously required a medical degree to interpret the images. Just because something can now be interpreted by the masses doesn’t change the nature of what is actually done.

Therefore, I agree with my BMA colleagues in their decision not to support the lowering of the abortion limit from 24 weeks to 20 weeks. And I will continue to hold that position, until I hear a reasoned logical and scientific reason to change it.

This 651st post was filed under: News and Comment.






More posts worth reading

What I’ve been reading this month (published 5th October 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 3rd September 2017)

What I’ve been reading this month (published 5th August 2017)

Medicine for Medical Students by Marc Crutchley (published 17th January 2008)

On NokiaSoft (published 3rd September 2013)

Across a crowded room.. (published 4th January 2013)

A new design for sjhoward.co.uk (published 27th April 2014)


Comments and responses

Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


by sjhoward

Comment posted at 19:41 on 30th June 2005.

I’m not keen on the word ‘lowering’ to describe what’s happening to the limit, as the length of time is being reduced, rather than a level decreasing; but I can’t think of a word that would fit. Any suggestions?


Comment from Dr Henry Murdentaler


by Dr Henry Murdentaler

Comment posted at 21:34 on 1st July 2005.

Let’s just call it a license to kill babies.


Comment from sjhoward (author of the post)


by sjhoward

Comment posted at 12:54 on 2nd July 2005.

Nobody is sanctioning the killing of babies, though, so that would be somewhat misleading.


Compose a new comment



Comment

You may use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> .

If you would like to display a profile picture beside your comment, sign up for Gravatar, and enter your email address above.

By submitting your comment, you confirm that it conforms to the site's comment policy. Comments are subject to both automatic and human moderation, and may take some time to appear.



The content of this site is copyright protected by a Creative Commons License, with some rights reserved. All trademarks, images and logos remain the property of their respective owners. The accuracy of information on this site is in no way guaranteed. Opinions expressed are solely those of the author. No responsibility can be accepted for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information provided by this site. This site uses cookies - click here for more information.